Defensible Decision-Making
Joanna Emma Foster
BA (Hons) Oxon, PGC (Child, Adolescent and Family Mental Health)
© fabtic ltd
Today’s workshop
We will explore:
• The concept of defensible decisionmaking
• The work of Professor Hazel Kemshall
in defining defensible decision-making
• How defensible decision-making can
be applied to frontline work in the fire
service
• Applying defensible decision-making
to your work
Decision-Making
Background Context
• Professional risk-taking is carried out for “the
benefit of others from a duty (moral, legal or
employment-based) to assist them” (Carson and
Bains, 2008)
• Key identifiable trait of a professional is
“autonomous decision-making, underscored by
a distinct, theoretical, expert knowledge base”
(May and Buck, 1998)
“Expert Knowledge Base”
• The theory, research findings, evidence and
practice wisdom relevant to the role
• Ability to collate and analyse different types of
information and evidence
• Able to respond to new information
and changing circumstances
Defensible Decision-Making
Against this backdrop of expectations, the
concept of defensible decision-making has been
widely adopted as a means of making more
explicit what decision-making involves
Group Activity
What is defensible decision-making?
Definition of
Defensible Decision Making –
A defensible decision has been defined as a
decision that will withstand ‘hindsight scrutiny’
should the case ‘go wrong’ and negative
outcomes have occurred.
Defensible Decision-Making
Defensible Decision-Making
• Appropriate levels of knowledge and skill
• Decisions grounded in evidence
• Collect, verify and thoroughly evaluate information
• Communication with relevant others
• Use reliable risk assessment tools
• Take all reasonable steps
• Stay within policies and procedures
• Match intervention to risk factors and maintain contact at a level commensurate
with the level of risk
• Respond to escalating risk, deteriorating behaviours and non-engagement
• Clear recording
Applying Defensible DecisionMaking to Fire Service Work
Defensible Decision-Making
1. Appropriate levels of knowledge and skill – how has the practitioner
been selected and trained?
2. Decisions grounded in evidence – evidence of case and general
literature
3. Collect, verify and thoroughly evaluate information – fill in the gaps
4. Communication with relevant others – the client themselves; parents
and carers; other agencies
5. Use reliable risk assessment tools – consider the risk assessment
tools available
Defensible Decision-Making
6. Take all reasonable steps – what is reasonable within your agency’s
role and remit?
7. Stay within policies and procedures – the need for written policies
and procedures, which are reviewed regularly
8. Match intervention to risk factors and maintain contact at a level
commensurate with the level of risk – tailor the response to the
individual risk and need of the individual
9. Respond to escalating risk, deteriorating behaviours and nonengagement – dynamic working
10. Clear recording – account for actions taken and not taken
DPA and GDPR
The Data Protection Act 2018 and General Data
Protection Regulation allow practitioners to
“store and share information for safeguarding
purposes, including information which is
sensitive and personal”
Working Together to Safeguard Children 2018
Key Considerations
Whenever you make decisions about the risk of harm
presented, always ask yourself:
• How defensible is your decision?
• Which of the defensible criteria does your decision meet?
• How do you evidence this?
• Would your decision-making pass a review if it was
required to?
Group Activity
Think of a recent case you have worked
on. Would your decision-making pass a
review if it was required to?
Thank You
jfoster@fabtic.co.uk
www.fabtic.co.uk
References
Carson, D. (1996) Risking legal repercussions in: Kemshall, H. and Pritchard, J.
Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management, Ch 1, Vol. 1. London:
Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Carson, D. and Bain, A. (2008) Professional Risk and Working with People.
London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Kemshall, H. (1997) The Management and Assessment of Risk: Training Pack.
London: Home Office.
Kemshall, H. (1998) Risk in Probation Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Kemshall, H. (1998) Defensible Decisions for Risk: Or “It's the Doers Wot Get the
Blame”. Probation Journal, Vol. 45 (2), pp. 67-72.
May, T. and Buck, M. (1998) ‘Power, professionalism and organisational
transformation’. Sociological Research Online 3,2. Available at
www.socresonline.org.uk/3/2/5.